Friday, August 16, 2019

Impossible Whopper review (Photos)

The Impossible Whopper at Burger King is the first nationwide release of a plant-based burger at a quick-service chain with locations in every region of the country, and has generated tremendous interest from beef and non-meat eaters alike. It is flame-grilled on the same equipment as the beef burgers at Burger King, as noted on the chain's website. The Impossible Whopper is not necessarily more healthy than the all-beef Original Whopper, and with the Whopper being my favorite burger, I certainly approached the sandwich with high expectations - and a high price, more than a beef Whopper at over $7.00 here in Montgomery County.

Out of the wrapper, the overall sandwich looks like a Whopper at first glance - it has all the same toppings, and comes without cheese unless requested for an extra fee like the Original Whopper. The toppings were colorful, fresh and high-quality as they are on the beef Whopper, as well. It appears the Impossible Whopper patty is the same circumference and width as the classic Whopper.

Once the top bun is removed, however, the illusion falters. The Impossible patty is perfectly circular, and perfectly flat, unlike a hand-formed beef burger's irregular surface and edge. While sporting the identical flame-broiled grill marks as the famous Whopper, the patty does not match the beef Whopper in color - it leans toward brown more than grey. It looks like a mechanically-sliced patty from a machine-formed loaf.

The Impossible Whopper has the flame-grilled aroma of a Whopper, but does not replicate the beef aroma. Biting into the Impossible Whopper, one finds the texture is similar to ground beef in chewiness, but not in overall texture. The patty material is packed differently from a beef patty. There is no juiciness, making it a drier burger than a real beef Whopper.

Flavorwise, the Impossible Whopper has even-stronger flame-grilled taste - it's almost too much, and appears to be perhaps intentionally so to mask the lack of real beef flavor. A beef Whopper has a more balanced beef-smoke ratio, and tastes like a burger you made on a backyard grill. The Impossible Whopper tastes as if additional smoke flavor has been added beyond what the flame-broiling process alone bestows.

My final verdict? The Impossible Whopper seems to have overwhelmed hipsters in the mainstream press. The Washington Post declared it indistinguishable from a regular beef Whopper. They need to get out more often. I know the Whopper, I love the Whopper, and I would not be fooled in the least in a blind taste test that I was eating a beef Whopper with the Impossible Whopper. Perhaps you could fool the average person that they were eating a cafeteria hamburger, but that's as far as you could dupe most people - on a good day.

The Impossible Whopper is an event. You really should try one yourself. It may be a luxury item compared to what it forced on the American people down the road. And if you either simply want a non-meat alternative on the menu, or you love the Whopper but for whatever reason are no longer able to eat beef, this could be a great choice for you.

But if you're an extreme Whopper fan like me, you'll likely find it fails to recreate the magic of Burger King's signature burger. I'd recommend running out now and getting a fresh, juicy Original all-beef Whopper, which I rate six out of five stars (not a misprint). As far as the Impossible Whopper, I will give it a "good" three stars out of five - it delivers the alternative some diners very much want, but can't fool true Whopper fans enough to earn five stars.

"The Impossible Whopper seems to have overwhelmed hipsters in the mainstream press." Hipsters! You and you insane use of terms to describe the normal citizen that you are not one is as insane as your review. The IW main ingredient, a plant-based alternative to meat, has been on the market for over two years. BK is just getting around to offering it on their menu, due to the massive demand from the "hipster" public. You'll be doing the hipsters, and the gneral pop a hugh favor by keeping your unrefined taste buds in culinary lockup. LOCK THEM UP! LOCK THEM UP! LOCK THEM UP! LOCK THEM UP!

11:48: If so, how did my reviewing skills prove superior to Tim Carman of the Post, who claimed the Impossible patty tasted just like a Whopper to him with all the toppings? Sounds like it's the other way around - perhaps the most-qualified person to weigh in on fast food is one who actually eats it, and has some expertise in the field.

1:46: By our respective reviews of the Impossible Whopper. The pretentious "expert" food critic assured us you couldn't distinguish between the Impossible and regular Whoppers due to the amount of condiments on top.

In reality, anyone who actually knows the Whopper can tell the difference in the first bite.

For once you are absolutely coorect, one who eats it, rather that makes a visual mastication so disturbing it get censored. Professional food critics know what they are looking for, unlike a rookie blooger whose palate can't distinguish corned beef hash from Alpo. The pros don't stare into a cellphone while narrating like a circus jugular/clown looking for a laugh. "Superior skills"? Get the fat out.